Fair Share: Allocation of Transit O&M Costs Between Multiple Partners
|
|
- Janel Randall
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Fair Share: Allocation of Transit O&M Costs Between Multiple Partners Nathan M. Macek, AICP Parsons Brinckerhoff Washington, D.C. Amanda Wall Vandegrift, EIT Parsons Brinckerhoff Washington, D.C. INTRODUCTION This paper examines practices employed by transit agencies across North America to allocate light rail, heavy rail, and commuter rail operations and maintenance (O&M) and rehabilitation and replacement (R&R) costs between multiple parties. It focuses on arrangements in which one public agency is a transit service provider that is compensated by another public agency for the service provided within its jurisdictional territory. The results of this research provide value to agencies seeking to establish or re-define cost sharing arrangements. The presentation uses case studies to summarize methodologies used to allocate costs between parties; measures applied to allocate costs; compensating revenues credited to the purchasing agency; and the workability of the arrangement. Attributes of workable arrangements include simplicity; equity; measurability; and sustainability. The research shows that there is a tradeoff between the simplicity of a funding agreement and the equitability of the resulting funding allocations. Simple arrangements also tend to use metrics that are easy to measure. As a result there may be benefits to utilizing a more simple approach, such as improved transparency and lower implementation costs. Conversely, the most equitable transit cost allocation arrangements tend to have complex methodologies that apply multiple metrics. These may end up being more sustainable in the long-term because they maintain a strong nexus between the benefits a jurisdiction receives from the transit system or project, and the amount of funding they are contributing. These agreements may also represent a long-standing regional consensus that is difficult to change by a single funding partner. If the arrangement fails to maintain an equitable allocation of costs, the arrangement is typically not sustainable, especially on a long-term basis. APPROACH The transit cost sharing arrangements were reviewed for 10 agencies from across North America, summarized in Table 1. The services include heavy rail, light rail, and commuter rail, and represent several arrangements that allocate transit costs across multiple jurisdictions The transit cost allocation approach for each arrangement is summarized according to the following criteria: Use of funds: whether the funds are applied as O&M costs, R&R costs, or both Methodologies: the protocol used to allocate costs between parties Metrics: measures applied to allocate costs Compensating revenues: revenues credited to the purchasing agency under the arrangement Reserve fund requirements: any reserve accounts required by the cost allocation arrangement Workability of the arrangement: the ability of the arrangement to address transit cost allocation The workability section summarizes the extent to which each arrangement is: Simple: the arrangement is transparent, easy to comprehend, and easy to implement Equitable: the arrangement provides a fair allocation of costs for the project between parties Measurable: the metrics are easy to measure and obtain Applicable: the arrangement addresses both O&M and R&R costs Sustainable: the arrangement will remain relevant and usable on a long-term basis 1
2 Transit Cost Allocation Case Studies Arrangement / Location Technology Parties Involved Background BART San Francisco Airport (SFO) Extension San Mateo County, California Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) Spadina Subway Extension York, Ontario, Canada Metropolitan Transportation Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Metrorail Silver Line Extension Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Sound Transit Link Metropolitan Seattle, Washington Valley Metro Rail Central Mesa Extension Metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona Heavy Rail BART and San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) $1.5 billion, 8.7 mile, 4 station extension, opened June 2003 Heavy Rail TTC and York Region $2.6 billion, 5.4 mile, 6 station subway extension, opening fall 2016 Heavy Rail Light Rail Light Rail WMATA and its member jurisdictions Sound Transit and its geographic subareas Valley Metro and the City of Mesa $5.6 billion, 23.1 mile, 11 station extension. Phase 1 opening 2014; Phase 2 opening 2018 $2.6 billion, 15.6 mile, 13 station initial operating system opened 2009 $200 million, 3.1 mile, 4 station extension opening 2016 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Metro-North Railroad New Haven Line Connecticut Metrolink Metropolitan Los Angeles, California Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) Wilmington/Newark Line Delaware Amtrak State-Supported Corridor Trains Nationwide Intercity Rail Metro-North and Connecticut Department of Transportation (CDOT) 74 mile, 30 station, commuter rail line first serviced by Metro-North in 1983 South California Regional 500 mile, 55 station, commuter Rail Authority (SCRRA) and rail system first serviced by its member agencies Metrolink in 1992 SEPTA and Delaware Transit Corporation (DTC) Amtrak and its member states 87 mile, 22 station, commuter rail line first serviced by SEPTA in state-supported routes in 15 states across the country BART Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension Santa Clara County, California Heavy Rail BART and VTA $2.3 billion, 10.1 mile, 2 station extension, opening in 2018 Table 1. Transit Cost Allocation Case Studies Reviewed CASE STUDIES Case studies for each of the agencies summarized in Table 1 are profiled below. FINDINGS Simplicity Four of the arrangements, Metrolink, Amtrak, Sound Transit, and the BART-VTA Comprehensive Agreement, are complex, using multiple metrics and methodologies. As a result, the arrangements are generally difficult to interpret and implement, requiring substantial bookkeeping and complex financial modeling. It may also be difficult for the funding agencies to describe these agreements succinctly to external stakeholders, elected officials, and the public. The six remaining case studies are relatively simple arrangements that apply a limited number of metrics and methodologies. The simplest arrangements generally include lump sum payments toward the respective service, typically in the form of capital investments to fund upfront capital costs. Examples of such arrangements include the TTC-York Region arrangements and elements of the BART-SamTrans arrangement. Other arrangements that apply simplified metrics and methodologies include the WMATA, Valley Metro-Central Mesa, Metro-North- CDOT, and SEPTA-DTC arrangements. Equity Many of the arrangements are equitable with regard to current service levels. However, the arrangements may not remain equitable if there are future expansions or changes in service levels. WMATA and Sound Transit, both transit cost allocation arrangements spanning multiple jurisdictions, are generally equitable. However, there are implications for future service planning by Sound Transit given that the location of sales tax revenues generated does not necessarily correlate with locations where future transit investment are most warranted. The most equitable arrangements tend to allocate costs based on a combination of metrics such as ridership, train miles, and population. 3
3 Measurability Metrolink, Amtrak, and the BART-VTA Comprehensive Agreement are among the least measurable. Though they apply metrics which alone are easily measured, these arrangements include an excess of measurements that collectively may be difficult to obtain and apply. The seven remaining case studies are relatively easy to measure, especially given the limited number of metrics used. The most measurable arrangements generally call for a limited quantity of metrics that can easily be obtained through typical transit data collection methods, and can be easily projected using common service planning parameters. Applicability The majority of arrangements address both O&M and R&R costs of the respective service. The arrangements that do not address R&R costs, such as WMATA and SEPTA-DTC, apply separate capital agreements which address the allocation of R&R costs. Sustainability It is important to note that though equity is a large factor, it is not the sole contributor to the sustainability of an agreement. For example, the sustainability of an agreement can be influenced by the complexity of the arrangement, the number of jurisdictions involved, the ease of the parties to alter the arrangement, or the consequences of a funding partner removing itself from the arrangement. Sound Transit s agreement is complex and uses a broad interpretation for jurisdictional benefit. However, it shows signs of flexibility for future needs and sustainability concerns. The TTC-York arrangement and Valley Metro-Central Mesa arrangement were drafted for services that have not yet opened to service. These arrangements are currently sustainable given the recent agreement of terms between the respective entities. However, once the commencement of revenue service begins to impact the funding contributions of the member jurisdictions, the long-term sustainability of these agreements may be tested. The remaining four arrangements are likely to be more sustainable due to a significant improvement from a previous agreement (BART-SamTrans), a long-term history of successful implementation (WMATA, Metrolink), or a recent renewal of the agreement (Metro-North-CDOT). The SEPTA-DTC agreement addresses sustainability directly within its methodology, adjusting annually and allowing flexibility for future changes in the service. There is a tradeoff between the simplicity of a funding agreement and the equitability of the resulting funding allocations. Simple arrangements also tend to use metrics that are easy to measure. As a result there may be benefits to utilizing a more simple approach, such as improved transparency and lower implementation costs. Conversely, the most equitable transit cost allocation arrangements tend to have complex methodologies that apply multiple metrics. These may end up being more sustainable in the long-term because they maintain a strong nexus between the benefits a jurisdiction receives from the transit system or project, and the amount of funding they are contributing. These agreements may also represent a long-standing regional consensus that is difficult to change by a single funding partner. If the arrangement fails to maintain an equitable allocation of costs, the arrangement is typically not sustainable, especially on a long-term basis. Each of the case studies provides important insight on transit cost allocation methodology. The Metro-North- CDOT arrangement is most workable according to the criteria applied in this analysis. The arrangement for the New Haven commuter rail line bases O&M and R&R cost allocation on a few simple metrics. The arrangement is more equitable than the majority of case studies and is generally sustainable given that it has been in effect for several decades and was recently renewed. For heavy rail transit cost allocation, the BART- SamTrans agreement and the WMATA arrangement are generally workable. The BART-SamTrans agreement is simple to implement and understand. The agreement is more equitable and sustainable than the agreement it replaced. The WMATA arrangement is different from the BART-VTA and BART-SamTrans arrangements given that it applies to multiple jurisdictions. However, the arrangement addresses equity across the jurisdictions using two simple formulas and three metrics that are easy to measure and obtain. In addition, the arrangement addresses a complex geography for transit cost allocation, serving two states and the District of Columbia and multiple local jurisdictions, and has remained in place since its inception. CONCLUSIONS 3
4 4
5 5
MOW Spending: Transit Rail Infrastructure Investments
2018 MOW Spending: Transit Rail Infrastructure Investments Bigger budgets and bigger workloads emerge in the 17th annual Progressive Railroading MOW Spending Report. By Jeff Stagl, Managing Editor TABLE
More informationMEMORANDUM. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Board of Directors. Michael T. Burns General Manager. DATE: August 4, 2008
MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Board of Directors Michael T. Burns General Manager DATE: August 4, 2008 SUBJECT: BART Operating Subsidy This memorandum summarizes and
More informationTitle VI Approval of Major Service Change, Disparate Impact and Disproportionate Burden
Customer Service and Operations Committee Board Action Item III-A October 10, 2013 Title VI Approval of Major Service Change, Disparate Impact and Disproportionate Burden Page 3 of 42 Washington Metropolitan
More informationProposed FY2012 Operating Budget
Proposed FY2012 Operating Budget June 2, 2011 Overview Began budget discussions in January 2011 Reviewed FY2012 Preliminary Operating Budget at the May 5, 2011 JPB meeting Followed up Board member questions
More informationThe Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy Robert Puentes, Senior Research Manager
The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy Robert Puentes, Senior Research Manager Washington s Metro: Deficits by Design Presentation to the WMATA Board Committee June 3, 2004 Washington
More informationThe Price of Inaction
The Price of Inaction Economic Impact of SEPTA s Plan B Service Cuts and Fare Increases May 2007 Economy League of Greater Philadelphia April 2007 Agenda 1. Background: How did SEPTA get here? 2. The SEPTA
More informationProposed Annual Financing Plan 2013
SFMTA Municipal Transportation Agency Image: Historic Car number 1 and 162 on Embarcadero Proposed Annual Financing Plan 2013 02 19 2013 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA Proposed Financing Plan Overview SFMTA
More informationCHAPTER 9 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
CHAPTER 9 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS 9.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter presents anticipated costs, revenues, and funding for the Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative and the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit
More informationSOUND TRANSIT STAFF REPORT MOTION NO. M Select a draft Sounder fare structure change and fare increase for public review and comment
SOUND TRANSIT STAFF REPORT MOTION NO. M2007-21 Select a draft Sounder fare structure change and fare increase for public review and comment Meeting: Date: Type of Action: Staff Contact: Phone: Finance
More informationCaltrain Service Preparing for FY2012 Caltrain Benefits Environment, Economy, Quality of Life
Caltrain Service Preparing for FY2012 Caltrain Benefits Environment, Economy, Quality of Life If traveling via automobile, Caltrain riders would increase regional CO2 emissions by 89,850 metric tons or
More informationChapter 9 Financial Considerations. 9.1 Introduction
9.1 Introduction Chapter 9 This chapter presents anticipated costs, revenues, and funding for the NEPA BART Extension Alternative. A summary of VTA s financial plan for the BART Extension Alternative is
More informationCalifornia High-Speed Rail Project
California High-Speed Rail Project Summary of Major Changes Between: Draft 2012 Business Plan (November 1, 2011) Revised 2012 Business Plan (April 2, 2012) 1 April 2, 2011 1 Subject to consideration of
More informationCHAPTER 9 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
CHAPTER 9 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS 9.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter presents anticipated costs, revenues, and funding for the BEP and the SVRTP. A summary evaluation of VTA s financial plan for the proposed
More informationMetro 2025 Alternative Funding and Financing
Finance & Administration Committee Information Item IV-A June 12, 2014 Metro 2025 Alternative Funding and Financing 37 of 100 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary
More informationBART s Business Model
BART s Business Model July 31, 2018 What is Public Transit s Business Model? BART Background Basic Facts Regional rail rapid transit Elected Board of Directors: 9 Comprised of 3 Counties: - Alameda, Contra
More informationSan Mateo County Transit District Contribution to the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board
Issue Background Findings Conclusions Recommendations Responses Attachments San Mateo County Transit District Contribution to the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board Issue Since the Grand Jury Report
More informationWashington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metro Budget Overview
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metro Budget Overview February 2011 Metro 10,877 Employees (10,974 budgeted) 1,491 Buses 588 Escalators and 237 Elevators 106 Miles of Track 92 Traction Power
More informationFY METROLINK BUDGET AND LACMTA'S COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM
9 One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 213.922.2ooo Tel metro. net FINANCE, BUDGET AND AUDIT COMMITTEE JUNE 19, 2013 SUBJECT: ACTION: FY 2013-14 METROLINK BUDGET AND LACMTA'S COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM
More informationGRADING CALIFORNIA S RAIL STATION NEIGHBORHOODS
GRADING CALIFORNIA S RAIL STATION NEIGHBORHOODS Ethan N. Elkind Center for Law, Energy and the Environment (CLEE) UC Berkeley School of Law January 6, 2016 2 Grading major rail transit station neighborhoods
More informationRequested Budget Analysis: Operating Contingency Reserve
Budget Committee Fiscal 2008 Budget Review Item V - A2 January 11, 2007 Requested Budget Analysis: Operating Contingency Reserve Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority Board Action/Information
More informationNorthern Virginia Transportation Commission: 2018 Legislative and Policy Agenda
Northern Virginia Transportation Commission: 2018 Legislative and Policy Agenda Northern Virginia s economic growth and global competitiveness are directly tied to the region s transit network. Transit
More informationa GAO GAO INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak s Management of Northeast Corridor Improvements Demonstrates Need for Applying Best Practices
GAO United States General Accounting Office Report to the Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S. Senate February 2004 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak s Management of Northeast
More informationBART Silicon Valley Extension Phase II Funding Strategies Workshop
BART Silicon Valley Extension Phase II Funding Strategies Workshop January 20, 2016 BART Silicon Valley Phase II Project Update Kevin Kurimoto BART Silicon Valley Project Team Page 2 Phase II Extension
More informationLast year, transit spent almost $1.1 billion on materials and services contracts with more than 2,000 Pennsylvania businesses.
TRANSIT D+ 2006 Report Card for Pennsylvania s Infrastructure In recent years, transit use has increased faster than any other mode of transportation. More than one million Pennsylvanians use public transit
More informationPublic Meeting of the Mayors Council (Items 2, 3 and 4)
TransLink Room 427/428 Public Meeting of the Mayors Council (Items 2, 3 and 4) February 15, 2018 2 Item 2: Report of the Finance Committee Next Steps on the Phase Two Plan Item 2 3 3 Investment Plan Item
More informationReview of FasTracks Status and Future Strategic Direction
Review of FasTracks Status and Future Strategic Direction Regional Transportation District August 21, 2008 1 Overview RTD has experienced a dramatic increase in ridership over the past year, showing that
More informationGetting Metro Back on Track
NVTC Presents: Getting Metro Back on Track A discussion with Virginia members of the WMATA Board This forum is sponsored by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission. It is separate and distinct
More informationCALTRAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Item 6 Enclosure Board November 13, 2018 2019 PROPOSITION K 5-YEAR PRIORITIZATION PROGRAM CALTRAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Pending Board Approval: November 27, 2018 Prepared for the San Francisco County
More information3RD QUARTER November 2018
3RD QUARTER 2018 November 2018 0 Quarterly Financial and Performance Report 3rd Quarter 2018 3rd Quarter 2018 Financial and Performance Report Table of Contents Executive Summary... 2 Environmental Factors...
More informationFISCAL YEAR ADOPTED BUDGET With FY17-18 Projection (Informational only) FY18-19 Projection (Informational only)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 ADOPTED BUDGET With FY17-18 Projection (Informational only) FY18-19 Projection (Informational only) Adopted June 24, 2016 Los Angeles County
More informationRegional Transportation District FasTracks Financial Plan. April 22,
Regional Transportation District FasTracks Financial Plan April 22, 2004 2-1 Executive Summary The Regional Transportation District (the District or RTD ), has developed a comprehensive $4.7 billion Plan,
More information1 ST QUARTER 2017 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT
1 ST QUARTER 2017 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT May 2017 0 1 st Quarter 2017 Financial and Performance Report Table of Contents Executive Summary... 2 Environmental Factors... 4 Ridership...
More informationFISCAL YEAR BUDGET. Adopted June 23, 2017
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 BUDGET Including Forecast for FY2018-19 and FY2019-20 (informational purposes only) Adopted June 23, 2017 Los Angeles County Metropolitan
More informationU.S. Minimum Wage Chart
Alabama No provision. Alaska $9.75 Arizona $8.05 - Flagstaff Increasing to $9.80 on January 1, 2017. Indexed to inflation or $1 more than the federal minimum wage, whichever is higher. Increasing to $10.00
More information3 RD QUARTER 2016 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT
3 RD QUARTER 2016 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT November 2016 0 3 rd Quarter 2016 Financial and Performance Report Table of Contents Executive Summary... 1 Environmental Factors... 3 Ridership...
More informationImpacts of Transit Benefits Programs on Transit Agency Ridership, Revenues, and Costs
Impacts of Transit Benefits Programs Impacts of Transit Benefits Programs on Transit Agency Ridership, Revenues, and Costs Liisa Ecola, RAND Corporation Michael Grant, ICF International Abstract The federal
More information2019 U.S. Minimum Wage Chart
Alabama No provision. Alaska $9.89 Arizona $11.00 - Flagstaff $12.00 Indexed to inflation or $1 more than the federal minimum wage, whichever is higher. Increasing to $12.00 on and after January 1, 2020.
More informationWashington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary Action Information MEAD Number: 201433 Resolution: Yes No TITLE: Improving Safety Through Fare Enforcement PRESENTATION SUMMARY:
More informationMay 1, Dear Board of Directors:
May 1, 2018 Dear Board of Directors: As you know, Sound Transit is undertaking an ambitious effort to build a transformative mass transit system for the Puget Sound Region. Your involvement in that effort
More informationBallot Measure Description
2016 BALLOT MEASURE SCORERD AZ Flagstaff The Flagstaff City Council has approved placing a 10-year 0.295% renewal on the November ballot for the Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation
More informationAbout 40 years ago, a unique partnership was born to address transportation
Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy And The Greater Washington Research Program Transportation Reform Series Washington s Metro: Deficits by Design Robert Puentes 1 This brief examines the unusual
More informationRail Modernization Study REPORT TO CONGRESS. April Prepared by: Federal Transit Administration
REPORT TO CONGRESS April 2009 Prepared by: Federal Transit Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration 1201 New Jersey Avenue S.E. Washington DC 20590 The Honorable
More information4TH QUARTER 2016 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT
4TH QUARTER 2016 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT February 2017 0 Quarterly Financial and Performance Report 4th Quarter 2016 4th Quarter 2016 Financial and Performance Report Table of Contents
More information2 ND QUARTER 2017 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT
2 ND QUARTER 2017 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT August 2017 0 2 nd Quarter 2017 Financial and Performance Report Table of Contents Executive Summary... 2 Environmental Factors... 4 Ridership...
More informationIntroduction Project Overview How Express Lanes Work 101 Managed Lane Financial Forecast Performance Comparison Ownership Considerations Transit
Joint Board Ownership Workshop November 16, 2018 1 Introduction Project Overview How Express Lanes Work 101 Managed Lane Financial Forecast Performance Comparison Ownership Considerations Transit Equity
More informationBOARD OF DIRECTORS WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OF DIRECTORS WORKSHOP MEETING April 25, 2008 MINUTES 1. CALLED TO ORDER The Workshop Meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority s (VTA) Board of Directors was called to order by Chairperson
More informationPROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET. Testimony of. Richard Sarles, General Manager. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET Testimony of Richard Sarles, General Manager Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Before the Council of the District of Columbia Committee on Public Works and
More informationAD HOC FINANCIAL STABILITY COMMITTEE WORKSHOP AGENDA
AD HOC FINANCIAL STABILITY COMMITTEE Friday, June 8, 2018 12:00 PM VTA Auditorium 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA WORKSHOP AGENDA CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. Introductions 3. Orders of the Day 4.
More informationWhy Consider a Growth Charge?
Funding Growth-Related Capital Metropolitan Water District of Southern California LRFP Rate Structure Group October 17, 2007 2006 2007 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. All Rights Reserved Why Consider a Growth Charge?
More information2.0 PROJECT FINANCIAL PLAN...
Table of Contents Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of Financial Plan... 1-1 1.2 Key Changes Since 2010 Financial Plan... 1-2 1.3 Project Description... 1-4 1.4 Project Sponsor: Los
More informationAdopted Biennial Budget
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Adopted Biennial Budget Fiscal Years 21 and 211 July 1, 29 June 3, 21 and July 1, 21 June 3, 211 Search Instructions Items in this PDF version of the FY 21 and
More information2007 Legislative Program Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Approved: November 10, 2006
State Legislative Items: Additional Transportation Funding 2007 Legislative Program Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Approved: November 10, 2006 Position: The Northern Virginia Transportation
More information8. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
8. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS This chapter presents the financial analysis conducted for the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO) for the.
More informationCaltrain Funding 101
Caltrain Funding 101 Prepared for: SFMTA Board Meeting Prepared by: Caltrain Staff Date: February 7, 2012 Caltrain Funding 101 Overview Funding contribution is guided by Joint Powers Agreement Funding
More informationDRCOG is local officials working together to address the region's challenges for today and tomorrow. Metro Vision 2040
DRCOG is local officials working together to address the region's challenges for today and tomorrow A plan to make life better for people of all ages, incomes and abilities Equitable sharing of costs and
More informationNORTHERN VIRGINIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY MEMORANDUM
XVI NORTHERN VIRGINIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY MEMORANDUM FOR: FROM: Chairman Martin E. Nohe and Members Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Monica Backmon, Executive Director DATE: December 8,
More informationFY2017 Budget Work Session
Finance & Administration Committee Information Item IV-B January 14, 2016 FY2017 Budget Work Session Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary Action Information MEAD
More information2012 Ballot Initiatives Report
2012 Ballot Initiatives Report Voters on November 6 showed once again the importance of transportation by approving 68 percent of the measures to or extend funding for highways, bridges and transit. This
More informationTRANSIT SYSTEM MAINTENANCE AND RENOVATION. VEHICLES - Caltrain
Item 6 Enclosure Board November 13, 2018 2019 PROPOSITION K 5-YEAR PRIORITIZATION PROGRAM TRANSIT SYSTEM MAINTENANCE AND RENOVATION VEHICLES - Caltrain Pending Board Approval: November 27, 2018 Prepared
More informationCHAPTER 7: Financial Plan
CHAPTER 7: Financial Plan Report Prepared by: Contents 7 FINANCIAL PLAN... 7-1 7.1 Introduction... 7-1 7.2 Assumptions... 7-1 7.2.1 Operating Revenue Assumptions... 7-2 7.2.2 Operating Cost Assumptions...
More informationMeasure I Strategic Plan, April 1, 2009 Glossary Administrative Committee Advance Expenditure Agreement (AEA) Advance Expenditure Process
Glossary Administrative Committee This committee makes recommendations to the Board of Directors and provides general policy oversight that spans the multiple program responsibilities of the organization
More informationInvestor Presentation Q1 2013
Investor Presentation Q1 2013 1 Aqua Marina Del Rey Marina BRE Del Properties, Rey, CAInc. h 2 Investment Highlights West Coast apartment REIT $5.4 billion total market capitalization apartment REIT with
More informationSIX AGENCY COMMITTEE. Statements of Cash Receipts and Disbursements (Cash Receipts and Disbursements Basis) Years ended June 30, 2013 and 2012
Statements of Cash Receipts and Disbursements (Cash Receipts and Disbursements Basis) (With Independent Auditors Report Thereon) KPMG LLP Suite 700 20 Pacifica Irvine, CA 92618-3391 Independent Auditors
More informationAGENDA Bacciocco Auditorium, 2 nd Floor 1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos CA 94070
BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2011 SEAN ELSBERND, CHAIR OMAR AHMAD, VICE CHAIR JOSÉ CISNEROS NATHANIEL P. FORD, SR. ASH KALRA LIZ KNISS ARTHUR L. LLOYD ADRIENNE TISSIER KEN YEAGER MICHAEL J. SCANLON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
More informationThe Future Scenarios
The Future Scenarios Developing the Scenarios Once the policy approach for each scenario was defined, the financial, service, and capital assumptions were developed further and are detailed in three supporting
More information1ST QUARTER May 2018
1ST QUARTER 2018 May 2018 0 1 st Quarter 2018 Financial and Performance Report Table of Contents Executive Summary... 2 Environmental Factors... 4 Ridership... 6 Peer Ridership Comparison... 7 Operating
More informationSanta Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2005 1996 Measure B U.S. 101 Widening Highway Project Paratransit services offer alternatives
More informationA review of rail transit s capital costs and operating losses
October 4, 2008. A review of rail transit s capital costs and operating losses The projected rail transit cost is understated. The 28 mile full corridor alignment is likely to cost nearly two billion dollars
More informationThe Annual William O. Lipinski i Symposium on Transportation Policy
The Annual William O. Lipinski i Symposium on Transportation Policy High Speed Rail Costs, Finance and Economic Development Potential November 14, 2011 Thomas E. Lanctot Principal and Group Head William
More informationDOWNLOAD OR READ : PROPOSED FIVE YEAR TRANSIT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS PROPOSED ANNUAL PROGRAM AND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEARS PDF EBOOK EPUB MOBI
DOWNLOAD OR READ : PROPOSED FIVE YEAR TRANSIT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS PROPOSED ANNUAL PROGRAM AND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEARS PDF EBOOK EPUB MOBI Page 1 Page 2 proposed five year transit program fiscal years
More informationProposed Service Change Title VI Compliance Review
Proposed Service Change Title VI Compliance Review May 2014 Submitted by: Table of Contents 1. Purpose... 3 2. Background... 3 3. Definition of Title VI and Environmental Justice Impact Policies... 3 3.1
More informationLos Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Agency Introduction March 9, 2012 Overview > MTA Role: Planning Construction Operation/Maintenance > 1,433 square-mile service area > Clean-air
More information2013 Triennial Customer Survey Results
2013 Triennial Customer Survey Results Board of Directors May 1, 2014 Objectives Determine who our customers are Demographics Trip purpose Mode of access Frequency of use Reasons for riding Measure whether
More informationSUBJECT: Capital Program and 10-Year Capital Forecast
MEETING DATE: October 23, 2002 SUBJECT: 2003-2007 Capital Program and 10-Year Capital Forecast RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Commission: 1. Approve the 2003-2007 Capital Program in the amount
More informationState Minimum Wage Chart (See below for Local/City Minimum Wage Chart)
State Current Minimum Wage State Minimum Wage Chart (See below for Local/City Minimum Wage Chart) Maximum Tip Credit Allowed for Tipped Employees Federal $7.25 $5.12 $2.13 Minimum Cash Wage for Tipped
More informationZipRealty, Inc. Supplemental Data Reclassification of Consolidated Statement of Operations
Reclassification of Consolidated Statement of Operations Effective January 1, 2007, for income statement presentation purposes, we have reclassified sales support and marketing expenses from general and
More informationEmployer-Based Commuter Benefits Programs: How they Work and their Impacts February 9, 2017
Employer-Based Commuter Benefits Programs: How they Work and their Impacts February 9, 2017 Michael Grant ICF Purpose / Overview Understanding types of commuter benefits programs What they are, how they
More informationFY2017 Budget Guidance
Finance & Administration Committee Information Item IV-D September 10, 2015 FY2017 Budget Guidance Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary Action Information MEAD
More informationMinimum Wage Regional Recommendation June 9, 2016
AGENDA ITEM #10.D Minimum Wage Regional Recommendation June 9, 2016 Minimum Wage Subcommittee Greg Scharff Rod Sinks History Cities Association priority in 2015 & 2016 June 2015 Cities Association position:
More informationSAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY
COUNCIL AGENDA: 6/21/16 ITEM: I.Zfj CITY OF SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY Memorandum TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Barry Ng Jim Ortbal Jennifer A. Maguire SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: Approved
More informationContents. Appendix. Cost Model Structure. Tables
Alternatives Analysis Alt ti A l i Technical Methodology Report: Operating and Cost Estimating and Results Prepared for: Washington County Regional Railroad Authority on behalf of the Gateway Corridor
More informationREVISED Supplemental Agenda
REVISED Supplemental Agenda One Gateway Plaza 3 rd Floor Boardroom PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING COMMITTEE Wednesday, May 20, 2009 1:00 P.M. 6.1 RECEIVE AND FILE status report on the Metro Gold Line Foothill
More informationMETRO. Metro Funding. Associated Master Plan: Comprehensive Master Transportation Plan (MTP) for Arlington. Neighborhood(s):
METRO METRO METRO 2017 2026 CIP Metro Funding Project Description The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA/Metro) is a unique federal-state-local partnership formed to provide mass transit
More informationTravel Guidelines (Revised ) Page 1
The Charles County Public Schools (CCPS) travel guidelines are intended to facilitate travel arrangements; to provide full reimbursement for all necessary expenses; and to protect employees against the
More informationHousing Tax Expenditures and the Economy
Housing Tax Expenditures and the Economy The GSEs, Housing, and the Economy January 24, 2011 Todd Sinai, The Wharton School Housing tax expenditures cost a lot Tax expenditure Mortgage interest deduction
More informationWHY PRIVATIZING LONG ISLAND BUS COULD COST TAXPAYERS MORE
WHY PRIVATIZING LONG ISLAND BUS COULD COST TAXPAYERS MORE Tri-State Transportation Campaign June 211 Executive Summary The failure of County to fund LI Bus has led to an annulment of the operating agreement
More informationV. FUNDING OPTIONS A. FUNDING THE NRPC -- THE GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT AGENCY
V. FUNDING OPTIONS The proposed rail passenger restructuring plan will only be effective if there are adequate, reliable sources of funding for the three types of entities being proposed: the NRPC (the
More informationPortal North Bridge Project Hudson County, New Jersey Core Capacity Project Development (Rating Assigned February 2017)
Portal North Bridge Project Hudson County, New Jersey Core Capacity Project Development (Rating Assigned February 2017) Summary Description Proposed Project: Commuter Rail Capacity Improvement 2.3 Miles
More informationPUBLIC HEARING ON WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2008 BUDGET
PUBLIC HEARING ON WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2008 BUDGET Before the Committee on Public Works and the Environment Council of the District of Columbia The Honorable Jim Graham,
More information2014 U.S. Census (2015) Median African-American Household Income Rank, Memphis Included. Household Median Income Ranking, African American Population
2015 2015 Rankings Report Prepared by Elena Delavega, PhD, MSW Department of Social Work Benjamin L. Hooks Institute for Social Change University of Memphis 2014 U.S. Census (2015) - Rank, Memphis Included
More informationWashington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority Board Action/Information Summary. MEAD Number: 99808
Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority Board Action/Information Summary Action Information MEAD Number: 99808 Resolution: Yes No PURPOSE To obtain Board approval to modify the MetroAccess
More informationIn their own words. From the Orange County Transportation Authority:
In their own words The Southern California News Group asked each special district with cash and investments exceeding $250 million to tell us more about why they need that cash (see detailed table of cash
More informationMetropolitan Transportation Authority. Investor Presentation
Metropolitan Transportation Authority Investor Presentation Transportation Revenue Green Bonds Series 2016A (Climate Bond Certified) February 11, 2016 Disclaimer The information contained in this Investor
More information917 S. LUSK STREET BOISE, ID LEW MANGLOS, MBA, CCIM, SIOR
917 S. LUSK STREET BOISE, ID 83607 LEW MANGLOS, MBA, CCIM, SIOR 208 472 2841 lew.manglos@colliers.com 917 S LUSK ST Table of Contents Property Overview Valuation Location Layout Images Demographics Area
More informationProposed Budget Fiscal Year 2010 July 1, 2009 June 30, 2010
Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2010 July 1, 2009 June 30, 2010 Presented to the Board of Directors: Finance, Administration, and Oversight Committee January 8, 2009 1 General Manager s Overview And Summary
More informationJPB CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMTTEE San Mateo County Transit District Administrative Building 1250 San Carlos Avenue San Carlos, CA 94070
DRAFT JPB CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMTTEE San Mateo County Transit District Administrative Building 1250 San Carlos Avenue San Carlos, CA 94070 MINUTES - DECEMBER 19, 2007 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: G. Graham,
More informationFORMER MACY S DEPARTMENT STORE 1406 N GALLERIA DR NAMPA, ID
FORMER MACY S DEPARTMENT STORE 1406 N GALLERIA DR NAMPA, ID DAVID CADWELL 208 472 3857 david.cadwell@colliers.com MIKE CHRISTENSEN 208 472 2866 mike.christensen@colliers.com This document has been prepared
More informationRegional Connector Transit Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Draft Environmental Impact Report APPENDIX HH FINANCIAL ANALYSIS REPORT
Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Draft Environmental Impact Report APPENDIX HH FINANCIAL ANALYSIS REPORT State Clearinghouse Number: 2009031043 April 2010 Prepared for Los Angeles County Metropolitan
More informationSTAFF REPORT. Meeting Date: October 24, 2017
Meeting Date: October 24, 2017 STAFF REPORT Agency: Staff Contact: Agenda Title: Agenda Action: City of Belmont Greg Scoles, City Manager, (650) 595-7408; gscoles@belmont.gov Local in Belmont Discussion
More informationPOLICY PLAYBOOK TRANSIT 2018 PROVINCIAL ELECTION
POLICY PLAYBOOK TRANSIT 2018 PROVINCIAL ELECTION THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE REGION One of the fastest growing metros in North America, Toronto is a vibrant, global city, consistently ranking
More information